CANCER BAD LUCK? I have had quite a few emails regarding the recent article claiming that bad luck is the cause of cancer. PLEASE! First they blamed genes. Hard to defend that absurd hypothesis as cancer rates exponentially rose during a period of virtually no genetic change in the human species over the past 100 years. Further, how could cancer treatment ever work if cancer was genetic? People have the same genes before, during, and after cancer treatment! Cancer treatment does not change gene code so, if cancer is genetic, how could a treatment that does not change genes ever be effective? Absurd. Epigenetics put a final nail in the genetic hypothesis. Now they are claiming it is all about luck based on random genetic mutation. I could go on and on about how they ignored the plastic ability to repair DNA damage but there really is no need. Just consider the fact that the per capita incidence rates of so many cancers has been steadily increasing over the past 50 years. Now, if this is random luck then what they are really saying is that random luck is getting significantly worse each year and causing a linear increase in cancer rates. How can they explain this non random increase in cancer with a hypothesis based on randomness? String of predictable bad luck or string of worsening luck? Moronic! Per Dr. James Chestnut!
Posted on: Tue, 06 Jan 2015 21:49:53 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015